Archive for October, 2011
Rush Limbaugh And Other Conservatives Come To Defense Of Herman Cain And Marco Rubio: The Question Is Why?
Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh and all of the other talk shows hosts of the conservative brand on talk radio and Fox News Channel have rushed to the defense of Herman Cain and Marco Rubio, both of whom have ethical issues that are glaring.
Herman Cain has been accused of sexual harassment, a la Clarence Thomas, and already the chant is, as Thomas called it twenty years ago, that a “high tech lynching” is going on !
In other words, if a conservative African American is involved in inappropriate behavior, suddenly conservatives become “open minded” on the issue of race while utilizing it regularly against President Barack Obama. And also realize that Cain has been accused now of financial misconduct in the manner of raising money for his campaign, all this on top of his constant inconsistency on every issue that is brought up in his campaign.
At the same time, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has clearly lied about his family’s reason for coming to America from Cuba, manufacturing the false story that they were escaping Fidel Castro, who only came to power two and a half years after his family migrated to the United States. Rubio gained much of his support based on this false family history, but to conservatives, that does not matter, and they come rushing to his defense, while showing anti Latino and anti Hispanic sympathies on the issue of immigration on a regular basis on their radio and television shows.
What hypocrisy, and it is clear the reason for backing these two men is not just because they agree with their political positions, but also as a way to deflect charges of anti black, anti Hispanic, and anti immigrant actions and statements!
Libertarian and Republican Presidential candidate, Texas Congressman Ron Paul always draws interest when he makes his statements and announces his platform, because it is so contradictory to that of all the other GOP candidates.
He is much loved by many young people, including college students, who have a utopian view of having very little government in the complex world of the 21st century.
However, with his new suggestion that college student loans be ended over a period of time, along with the Department of Education itself, many young people and other Americans who are enamored with him might have second thoughts.
His comment that anyone who wants an education will be able to get one is preposterous on its face, as realize how many poor whites and minorities go into the military precisely for the chance to get a low cost education, something that should not be a factor in volunteering to put oneself in harm’s way!
While many students may graduate with high levels of debt, to eliminate the government promoting education is a guarantee of FEWER college graduates, which even with the tough realities of unemployment problems today, is still the best way to promote job success and increased standard of living long term!
What Paul is doing is condemning millions of people not so fortunate to have wealthy parents, and facing the problems of constant struggle to survive, to have no way out of poverty or the struggling lower middle class!
That is only to be condemned as heartless, uncaring, narrow minded, and elitist, and certainly, Senator Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul, with a father who was a doctor in his younger years, did not face that kind of personal struggle, which might have prevented him from his career as an eye doctor before seeking public office!
This is more than enough reason to eliminate Ron Paul as a serious Presidential candidate, although it is certain that the GOP electorate will do that effectively in the early caucuses and primaries!
The Republican Party loves to accuse the Democrats and President Barack Obama of conducting “class warfare”.
In reality, what the GOP has been doing is conducting reverse “class warfare” on the middle class and the poor!
It is as if they are a reverse Robin Hood, and have no conscience about defending Wall Street, the banks, and the corporations, the one percent, against the 99 percent!
The only principle they have is to promote greater acquisition of wealth, and redistribute wealth to those who already have much more than anyone needs, and show no concern about those less fortunate, those unemployed due to their policies over a decade, those victimized by the stratification of society encouraged by these Republicans, as they believe in no regulations economically, but certainly wish to intrude on and control a person’s private rights and social existence!
So the Herman Cain candidacy was “fun” while it lasted, even though it lacked any principle, consistency, or substance!
How anyone could have seen Herman Cain as qualified to be President, when even his business background has been less than Wendell Willkie in 1940, the only businessman with no political experience to be a Presidential nominee, is beyond understanding!
The man has no concept or understanding of what it means to be President, as shown by his 9-9-9 plan, his abortion statements, his comments on a border fence to keep out illegal immigrants, his thoughts on dealing with terrorism, and refusing the idea of any Muslims in his cabinet.
For Herman Cain to believe he was qualified to be President shows a high level of arrogance and egotism, and it is just further proved by the revelation of charges of sexual harassment by two female staffers at the National Restaurant Association back in the 1990s, who were paid financial settlements and signed agreements not to talk about the incidents publicly.
Herman Cain refused to answer when asked four times by a reporter from Politico, and yet it is known such financial arrangements did occur, so it means Herman Cain’s campaign, while it might go on for a while, is not going to survive long term. The issue will dog him on the campaign trail, and it should turn evangelical Christians in Iowa and elsewhere against his candidacy.
To blame liberals for the reports is hypocrisy personified, as it is well known that many liberals have been exposed for sexual harassment, and this is not an issue of ideology. It is an issue of honesty, integrity, ethics, and responsibility for personal behavior, and Herman Cain cannot be allowed to claim he is a victim, what could be called the Clarence Thomas card!
Instead, just as much as John Edwards, Bill Clinton, and others have been pursued, personal behavior for public figures DOES matter, and it has nothing to do with politics!
The state of Mississippi, infamous for its long history of extreme racial violence and discrimination, is now attempting by ballot initiative to take down Roe V. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision which allows women the right to control their own reproductive lives.
It is one thing to claim that a five month fetus is seen as a “person” which might be able to live outside the womb. It is another thing to claim that a fertilized egg is to be seen as a “person”, and to declare that using an IUD, birth control pills, or the morning after pill (RU 486), all contraception methods is murder. It is outrageous that doctors, nurses, and the women themselves could be brought up on murder charges if an abortion is used to save the life of the mother in a situation where the pregnancy endangers her existence.
It is ironic that Mississippi, the state judged the MOST RELIGIOUS, would be the state that has no concern for women’s rights, and treats women as being controlled by men, who have no concept of what a pregnancy does to a woman, and to take the sexist view that every act of sexual intercourse should lead to a potential child.
It is also par for the course that Mississippi has the most violent record of mistreatment of African Americans of any state, and should hold its head in shame collectively for having the gall to promote such an initiative! Also, Mississippi is infamous for having many more capital punishment cases than most states.
Mississippi, close to the cheapest state in its attitude toward the poor, is also demonstrating yet again that it only is concerned about the birth of a fetus, rather than the health and welfare of its women and its poor population!
What hypocrisy, but it demonstrates just how significant the issue of the Supreme Court is in the upcoming Presidential Election of 2012, as if the Republican nominee wins, the rights of women will be curtailed by right wing Court appointments over time, and we will be back to the level of back alley abortions and unnecessary deaths of women who will not allow their personal lives to be controlled by religious zealots and theocratic fanatics
Conservative And Republican Ideas On Economy: Proved Wrong By What Has Happened In Great Britain In Past Year
Conservatives and Republicans keep on arguing that budget cuts are the answer, without any tax increases, and that government spending is the villain.
Meanwhile, the British government of Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron has been promoting fiscal austerity, which has failed to help their economic situation. Unemployment has risen, and the budget cuts have not revived business confidence or encouraged more hiring, as people have less to spend as a result.
The British are suffering with a bad economy made far worse by spending cuts in the public sphere. All it has done is make for more future budget cuts as people cannot spend, and is leading toward a policy that did not work during the early years of the Great Depression, but only made it far worse.
Promoting fiscal austerity only will doom the British economy to a long period of no growth and worse economic conditions. Cutting government spending will only cause reduced demand and less tax revenue, and the British experience should be a warning sign to the American government and the American people.
Will we learn from past mistakes during the Great Depression, or will we again prove that we do not learn from the lessons of history?
Today is a day that 82 years ago changed the course of history in a way only matched in significance by the outbreak of the Civil War at Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861.
In many ways, the onset of the Great Depression, as a result of the crash of the stock market on Wall Street, had a greater effect, since the population was four times as much, and more people were directly affected by the ten year long Great Depression than by the Civil War.
America would never be the same again, as big government was here to stay with the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt and American involvement in World War II and the ensuing Cold War, along with the improvements on the New Deal best personified by the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson.
And yet, now in the midst of the Great Recession and its effect on America, the worst economic times since the Great Depression, we are hearing the same old arguments for less government and deregulation, when it was precisely those factors in the 1920s and the 2000s that led to the two greatest economic collapses of the past century.
Franklin D. Roosevelt faced the same vehement opposition as Barack Obama, although the internet, talk radio, cable news and social media have multiplied the effect as compared to the 1930s.
The same battles keep on being fought, as we do not learn from history, and rather repeat its mistakes.
But as Barack Obama starts conducting himself for reelection in a similar manner as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman, the American people will realize that he, not his opposition, is truly interested in resolving the issues that the opposition took which caused the economic mess we are now in.
It is amazing how little this Presidential campaign of 2012 has been connected to foreign policy, and to constitutional law, as if ONLY the economy matters.
As much as the Great Recession and its supposed aftermath has created a major crisis for Americans, to overemphasize it is a dangerous action, as the LONG RANGE problem is much more our relations with the world AND the future of our judiciary.
Regarding the judiciary, the thought that a Republican President would select MORE conservatives to a Court already top heavy with conservatives is absolutely terrifying on issues such as the power and influence of corporations, the rights of women, the rights of gays, the role of religion in government, and the struggle to preserve civil rights and civil liberties.
For instance, if Michael Dukakis had been elected in 1988 instead of George H. W. Bush, we would not have had Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court.
If John Kerry had been elected President in 2004, instead of George W. Bush, we would not have had John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.
Going further back, if Walter Mondale had defeated Ronald Reagan in 1984, we would not have had Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, and Justice William Rehnquist would not have become Chief Justice.
So the election of the President has LONG TERM consequences in judicial and constitutional interpretation, just as much as foreign policy is not only short term, but long range affecting.
When one realizes that Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 78, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy are 75, it seems realistic to believe that all three COULD be out of office in the next term of office.
So the Court could become more conservative if a Republican is elected to the Presidency, and more moderate if Barack Obama is elected to a second term in the White House.
Therefore, every voter MUST realize that the Presidential election has consequences, not only in foreign policy long term, but also in the future of our legal system and our constitutional rights.
Today marks the 125th Anniversary of the Statue of Liberty, an icon of American values which has inspired generations of Americans, and has been a symbol of the best about America: its Immigrants!
The author, with his two sons, visited Liberty Island in 2010, and found it truly inspirational, with its message of the reality that America is a land of immigrants, the last best hope for refugees all around the world.
It is significant that Immigrants through the generations have faced discrimination, prejudice, and injustice, and the same fate awaits many immigrants, legal and illegal today.
Immigration has become a hot button issue in American politics, and its ugliness is very disturbing, but it must be remembered that it has always strengthened us as a nation, and we cannot allow nativism to rear its ugly head and deny basic human rights to those who come to our shores for a better life.
America is a nation of all nations, and that is its greatest virtue!
The Congressional Budget Office confirmed this week what has been well known for quite some time: America has seen a concentration of wealth in the past thirty years as never before in American history.
Income for the top one percent increased 275 percent, while the top 20 percent went up 65 percent. At the same time, the 20th percentile to the 80th percentile went up about 40 percent, and the lowest fifth 18 percent.
The top one percent of income earners control as much of the nation’s total income as they had on the eve of the Great Depression. They had 23.94 percent of the national income in 1929 and 23.5 percent in 2007.
When one looks at the top one tenth of one percent, the richest of the rich, they controlled 2.8 percent of national income in 1913, when the income tax amendment was put into the Constitution. In 2007, the top one tenth of one percent earned 6 percent of national income.
One major difference today is that the wealthiest usually have it from being financial and corporate executives, while in earlier times, they were mostly living off inherited wealth.
These figures cry out on why the “Occupy Wall Street” movement resonates among many Americans, and calls for some kind of action to tax the wealthy more to help resolve the budget crisis and deal with the many social and economic problems we face today in 2011.